I recently read a National Geographic, you can find it online but I'm not sure as to the volumn number, about the Coelacanth, a fish that was thought to have gone the way of the dodo more or less with the Dinos. Anyway, it made me wonder about the idea of evidence -- the evidence of absence isn't necessarily the absence of evidence. If the Coelacanth isn't dead, what else is out there. In terms of the ocean that's a huge area in which to never discovery a thing, but for Archaeology... well how much have we missed simply without digging another inch, let alone sites yet to be discovered.
But -- not to leave this on a negative, overwhelming plethora of worry about what's missed -- isn't that why we want to dig in the first place?
No comments:
Post a Comment